4.8 Article

Area-heterogeneity tradeoff and the diversity of ecological communities

出版社

NATL ACAD SCIENCES
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1208652109

关键词

habitat heterogeneity; neutral theory; stochastic model of community dynamics; conservation planning

资金

  1. Israel Science Foundation [1145/07, 454/11]
  2. Israel Ministry of Science and Technology

向作者/读者索取更多资源

For more than 50 y ecologists have believed that spatial heterogeneity in habitat conditions promotes species richness by increasing opportunities for niche partitioning. However, a recent stochastic model combining the main elements of niche theory and island biogeography theory suggests that environmental heterogeneity has a general unimodal rather than a positive effect on species richness. This result was explained by an inherent tradeoff between environmental heterogeneity and the amount of suitable area available for individual species: for a given area, as heterogeneity increases, the amount of effective area available for individual species decreases, thereby reducing population sizes and increasing the likelihood of stochastic extinctions. Here we provide a comprehensive evaluation of this hypothesis. First we analyze an extensive database of breeding bird distribution in Catalonia and show that patterns of species richness, species abundance, and extinction rates are consistent with the predictions of the area-heterogeneity tradeoff and its proposed mechanisms. We then perform a metaanalysis of heterogeneity-diversity relationships in 54 published datasets and show that empirical data better fit the unimodal pattern predicted by the area-heterogeneity tradeoff than the positive pattern predicted by classic niche theory. Simulations in which species may have variable niche widths along a continuous environmental gradient are consistent with all empirical findings. The area-heterogeneity tradeoff brings a unique perspective to current theories of species diversity and has important implications for biodiversity conservation.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据